Macalintal V Comelec
Macalintal V Comelec
Macalintal V Comelec
COMELEC
GR 157013, JULY 10, 2003
FACTS:
Romulo B. Macalintal, a member of the Philippine Bar, filed before the Court a petition for certiorari and
prohibition seeking a declaration that certain provisions of Republic Act No. 9189 (The Overseas
Absentee Voting Act of 2003) suffer from constitutional infirmity. Claiming that he has actual and
material legal interest in the subject matter of this case in seeing to it that public funds are properly and
lawfully used and appropriated, petitioner filed the instant petition as a taxpayer and as a lawyer.The
Court upholds the right of petitioner to file the present petition.
ISSUE:
Whether or not Section 25 of R.A. No. 9189 violates the independence of the COMELEC under Art. IX-A,
Sec. 1 of the Constitution.
HELD:
YES. Section 25 of R.A. No. 9189, with respect only to the second sentence in its second paragraph
allowing Congress to exercise the power to review, revise, amend, and approve the IRR that the
COMELEC shall promulgate, is violative of Art. IX, Sec. 1 of the Constitution which reads Section 1. The
Constitutional Commissions, which shall be independent, are the Civil Service Commission, the
Commission on Elections, and the Commission on Audit.
The ambit of legislative power under Article VI of the Constitution is circumscribed by other
constitutional provisions, one of which is the aforementioned provision on the independence of
constitutional commissions. The Court has held that whatever may be the nature of the functions of
the Commission on Elections, the fact is that the framers of the Constitution wanted it to be
independent from the other departments of the Government.
.